Parental emotion socialization in a Nordic cultural context: The impact of parental emotion-related socialization behaviors on Norwegian kindergarten
children’s emotion understanding and externalizing behavior problems.
Rune Flaaten Bjørk
Department of Psychology UNIVERSITY OF OSLO
2021
© Rune Flaaten Bjørk, 2022
Series of dissertations submitted to the Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Oslo No. 879
ISSN 1564-3991
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be
reproduced or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without permission.
Cover: Hanne Baadsgaard Utigard.
Print production: Reprosentralen, University of Oslo.
3 To my fathers
Sven, Einar, & Hans
“I’m in heaven when you smile” (Morrison, 1972)
4
“Feelings, whether of compassion or irritation, should be welcomed, recognized, and treated on an absolutely equal basis; because both are ourselves” (Hanh, 1975, p.60).
5
Table of contents
Acknowledgements ... 7
Part I ... 9
The summary (Kappa) ... 10
Abstract ... 11
List of papers ... 13
Introduction ... 14
The structure of this thesis ... 16
A Theoretical Framework of Emotion Socialization ... 16
Parental Meta-Emotion Philosophy (PMEP) framework ... 18
Child outcomes ... 22
Emotion understanding in children ... 22
Externalizing behavior problems ... 24
A family systems perspective on emotion socialization ... 27
The Nordic Cultural Context ... 30
Aims ... 32
Method ... 32
Participants and procedure ... 32
Paper I ... 33
Paper II ... 33
Paper III ... 34
Ethics ... 34
6
Measures ... 36
Statistical analyses ... 39
Results ... 40
Summary of paper I ... 40
Summary of paper II ... 41
Summary of paper III ... 41
Discussion ... 42
Overall Findings ... 43
Mothers’ contributions to externalizing problems ... 43
Fathers’ contributions to externalizing behavior problems ... 45
Mothers’ and fathers’ contributions to children’s emotion understanding ... 46
The Nordic Cultural Context reconsidered ... 47
Methodological considerations ... 51
Implications ... 55
Future directions ... 56
Conclusions ... 58
References ... 60
Part II ... 89
Papers I to III ... 90
7
Acknowledgements
This thesis is part of the Norwegian Tuning in to Kids (N-TIK) study carried out at the Department of Psychology at the University of Oslo. This is a large study evaluating the Norwegian version of the Tuning in to Kids parenting program, starting with the N-TIK pilot study in 2015, followed by the N- TIK RCT trial in 2017. I am grateful and privileged to be part of this project. In autumn 2016, I started working as a PhD student at the HUP (Health, Developmental and Personality Psychology) section at the Department of Psychology. I had worked in the eleven preceding years as a clinical child and family psychologist. The transition from the role as a psychologist specialist at the top of the “food chain” in the mental health service, to the role as PhD student at the bottom of the academic hierarchy was tough. All in all, I am very happy that I was welcomed into the N-TIK project, that I was invited to participate in designing the RCT study, and that I was hands-on during the data collection process. I am grateful to all the parents and children who participated in the study, and I am deeply grateful to my supervisors and to the University of Oslo for giving me the chance to complete a PhD in developmental psychology.
The learning curve has been as steep as the Besseggen mountain ridge, feelings of inadequacy as deep as the Black Sea and theoretical insights as bright as radiant sunshine. Luckily, I have had three excellent supervisors guiding me through this process. First, Evalill Bølstad Karevold has provided invaluable support both as the leader of the N-TIK project and main supervisor. Together we have climbed the RCT mountain, and “played each other well”, as we say in Norwegian. Second, Sophie S.
Havighurst has contributed with her substantial knowledge regarding emotion-coaching
interventions, and been a source of enormous growth, both academically and personally. Third, Francisco Pons has been a great support, an academic mentor and dear friend through this process of writing my PhD thesis and papers.
I would like to thank the Department of Psychology at the University of Oslo for funding my position and for having faith in me. I am deeply grateful to Espen Røysamb, former head of the HUP
8
section, who guided me through rough times. Thanks also to Krister Fjermestad, for inviting me in as a teacher at the Child and Family Psychology Clinic, and to the head of the clinical section, Ole Andre Solbakken, for hiring me in a permanent position as a university lecturer.
Thanks also to my wonderful colleagues at the Department of Psychology for long lunches and enlightening hallway chats. A special thanks goes to Tilmann von Soest who has been an invaluable oracle, a lighthouse in the stormy statistical seas. Thank you for leaving your door ajar (“på gløtt”, as we say in Norwegian), Tilmann, and thank you for taking time to answer both large and small
questions about statistical methods. A big thanks to Karine Porpino Viana for conversations on stress management, mindfulness, and meditation, and thanks to Ida Tidemann for conversations on teaching and emotional support. Thanks, also to Glenn Ostling for proofreading the finished thesis manuscript.
Finally, I must thank my family for supporting me along the path to an academic career. Love and kisses to my dear wife, Katja. I cannot breathe without you. Also, to our girls, Alma and Iben:
Thank you for being such wonderful human beings, and for reminding me to meditate whenever I lose my temper.
An integral part of becoming a family psychologist involves exploring family of origin, which I have been working on for years and will continue exploring for years to come. I would therefore also like to thank you, my dear mother Aase, for always being there for us. Thank you, dad, Sven, for doing as best you could when times were tough. Thank you for your hospitality, Uncle Einar and Aunt Torunn. Thank you, Inger and Hans, my parents-in-law, for all your love and support in bringing up your grandchildren.
And last but not least, many thanks to the Halfway family (Halveisfamilien), Kaja, Richard, Aurora and Luna, for being a rock solid, a loving and secure base in both our families’ attachment systems.
9
Part I
10
The summary (Kappa)
11 Abstract
Over the past 20 years, research on parental emotion-related socialization behaviors (ERSBs) has grown vastly, showing a significant relationship between parental ERSBs and children’s emotional competence and externalizing behavior problems. To date, no studies on emotion socialization have been conducted in the Nordic cultural context. The main aim of this thesis was thus to examine the relationship between parental ERSBs, children’s emotion understanding and externalizing behavior problems in two Norwegian samples of kindergarten children and their parents. This thesis consists of three papers. Paper I used baseline data (N = 257) from the N-TIK effectiveness trial (Clinical Trials: NCT04651465). Paper II and III used baseline and follow-up data (N = 40) from the Norwegian Tuning in to Kids (N-TIK) pilot study (Clinical Trials: NCT04851704). The main aim of paper I was to investigate how maternal and paternal ERSBs worked separately and in tandem as predictors of externalizing behavior problems in a sample of Norwegian kindergarten children. Paper II’s primary aim was to examine whether parental ERSBs exerted an effect on externalizing behavior, mediated through children’s emotion understanding. The main aim of paper III was to investigate whether children’s emotion understanding could be improved by enhancing parental ERSBs using the TIK parenting intervention.
In paper I we found that parental ERSBs were significant predictors of externalizing behavior problems. Paternal non-supportive ERSBs comprised a particularly strong predictor, predicting both father and teacher reports of externalizing behavior problems. Paternal non-supportive ERSBs interacted with maternal ERSBs, moderating the positive effect on teacher reported externalizing behavior problems. When mothers responded with high levels of emotional support in combination with a highly non-supportive father, children had more (not less) externalizing behavior problems than when mothers responded with lower levels of support. In paper II we found that parental non- supportive ERSBs (distress reactions) predicted externalizing behavior problems. In addition, we found evidence of an indirect pathway from supportive ERSBs (parental expressive encouragement) to externalizing behavior problems via children’s emotion understanding. In paper III we found that
12
the TIK program led to an increase in expressive encouragement. Parental emotion-focused responses decreased, and emotion understanding increased in both conditions, and positively predicted emotion understanding in children at baseline and follow-up.
An important contribution of this thesis is that it is the first study to replicate findings on emotion socialization theory and the Parental Meta-Emotion Philosophy (PMEP) theoretical framework in a Nordic cultural context (Eisenberg et al., 1998; Katz et al., 2012). In spite of cultural and sociopolitical differences, results suggested that emotion socialization processes are comparable to findings in the USA, where most emotion socialization research has been conducted (Cole & Tan, 2015). A second important contribution of this thesis is that it tests the emotion socialization model, finding evidence of an indirect pathway from parental emotion socialization to externalizing
behavior problems, mediated through children’s emotion understanding. A third important
contribution of this thesis is that it investigates how maternal and paternal ERSBs work in tandem as predictors of externalizing behavior problems in kindergarten children, finding evidence of a
significant interaction. Findings are discussed in light of family systems theory (Bowen, 1978;
Minuchin & Nichols, 1998).
Future research can profit from applying a family systems approach in the study of parental ERSBs (McElwain et al., 2007), and should include culturally relevant, rigorous methodologies in emotion socialization research to further reveal effects of culture (Raval & Walker, 2019). The research field would also benefit from a more comprehensive identification of central concepts (e.g., supportive/non-supportive ERSBs vs emotion coaching/dismissive responses) in the emotion
socialization literature (Jespersen et al., 2021), and the effect of emotion-focused parenting programs should be evaluated in Nordic samples.
13 List of papers
Paper I: Bjørk, R. F., Havighurst, S. S., & Karevold, E. B. (submitted). When two become one:
Maternal and paternal emotion-related socialization behaviors interacting as predictors of externalizing behavior problems in kindergarten children. Developmental Psychology.
Paper 2: Bjørk, R. F., Havighurst, S. S., Pons, F., & Karevold, E. B. (2020). Pathways to behavior problems in Norwegian Kindergarten Children: The role of parent emotion socialization and child emotion understanding. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology. https://doi.org/DOI:
10.1111/sjop.12652
Paper 3: Bjørk, R. F., Karevold, E. B., & Havighurst, S. S. (under review). Testing TIK (Tuning in to Kids) with TEC (Test of Emotion Comprehension): Does enhanced emotion socialization improve child emotion understanding? Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology.
14 Introduction
Child and family psychologists are interested in family processes that aid the development of children (Bowen, 1978; Eisenberg et al., 1998; Gottman et al., 1996; Katz et al., 2012; Minuchin &
Nichols, 1998; Morris et al., 2007). Based on theoretical models of children’s emotional development (Eisenberg et al., 1998; Katz et al., 2012), the current thesis examines how parental responses to children’s negative emotions are related to two important child outcomes, namely emotion understanding and externalizing behavior problems in children. These outcomes are important because they are related to other factors such as children’s social adjustment, school achievement and academic success (Bardack & Widen, 2019; Denham et al., 2015; Franco et al., 2017) as well as to aggression, anxiety, and depression in children (Bender et al., 2015; Schuberth et al., 2019;
Southam-Gerow & Kendall, 2002).
The present thesis explores in depth one important concept in the emotion socialization literature, namely parental emotion-related socialization behaviors (ERSBs). This concept involves how parents respond to and deal with emotions in families. Consider for example the following scenario: Your child stumbles headfirst to the ground. How do you respond? Your immediate reaction may be a degree of concern followed by relief when ascertaining that the fall caused no physical harm. But what do you say to your child as you pick her up? Do you comfort her, telling her it’s okay to cry, or do you scold her for being clumsy or careless? Emotion socialization theory suggests that parental reactions in these types of everyday interactions are important (Eisenberg et al., 1998). Parental reactions in such everyday events inform children of the significance of emotions (Gottman et al., 1996). This notion is backed by more than 20 years of research into the field of emotion socialization suggesting that parents’ ways of responding to children’s emotions are related to the development of children’s understanding of emotions and externalizing behavior problems (Eisenberg, 2020; Eisenberg et al., 1998; Johnson et al., 2017; Spinrad et al., 2020).
15
Emotion socialization should be examined cross-culturally, because several previous studies have found that emotion socialization can vary across cultures (Cole & Tan, 2015; Raval & Walker, 2019). To date, no studies on emotion socialization have been conducted in kindergarten children within a Nordic cultural context.
In Norway we have a saying, typically exclaimed by parents when children trip and fall: “Opp igjen!” (Up again!), which is typically pronounced in a cheerful, literally uplifting voice, implying that the child should get back on his or her feet, that everything is okay, and that life goes on as if nothing just happened (Wallace & Kjøs, 2012). As is argued below, although such parental responses to children’s emotions can be warm and sensitive, including the best intentions to solve children’s immediate problems (i.e., getting upright on their feet again), spending some time sitting with the child and exploring the child’s emotions before heading off again is time well spent (Gottman et al., 1996; Havighurst & Harley, 2007). Current research on emotion socialization suggests that taking time to validate, label and sooth emotions will aid children’s emotional development (Spinrad et al., 2020). Most research on emotion socialization is however conducted with US samples (Cole & Tan, 2015). In the current thesis, I will argue that the Nordic countries differ from other Western cultures in certain vital sociopolitical respects (Andersen et al., 2007; Datta Gupta et al., 2006; Zachrisson &
Dearing, 2015), making the study of emotion socialization within the Nordic cultural context significant (Ellingsæter, 2011; Lister, 2009).
From classical studies in family and developmental psychology, we now know that certain styles of parenting are related to better child outcomes (Baumrind, 1966; Gottman & Declaire, 1997;
Spinrad et al., 2020). Emotion socialization research can be used to develop new interventions, building confidence in parents and emotional competence in children (e.g., Gottman & Declaire, 1997; Havighurst & Harley, 2007; Katz et al., 2020). Research on emotion socialization is thus salient because it can inform child and family psychologists on how to help troubled families, to prevent difficulties from escalating, and to increase quality of life in normally developing families.
16 The structure of this thesis
A map is convenient when exploring new territory. I will therefore start with a short overview of this thesis. There are two main sections: Part 1 is the overall summary (referred to as the Kappa in Norwegian), consisting of an introduction, a presentation of aims, methods, results and a discussion.
Part 2 consists of three academic papers in their original form as either published or unpublished manuscripts.
In this summary, I will start with an introduction, presenting theoretical models and concepts, conceptually linking the aims of all three papers together, followed by a summary of methods and results. The summary discussion integrates findings from all three papers, discussing theoretical ideas that are not presented in the academic papers. Part 2 includes these academic papers, which can be read separately.
The introduction to the summary is organized as follows: First, emotion socialization theory is presented (Eisenberg et al., 1998); second, the parental meta-emotion framework is presented (Katz et al., 2012); third, a family systems approach to emotion socialization is suggested (McElwain et al., 2007); forth, research on the impact of parental ERSBs on emotion understanding and externalizing behavior problems are considered; and fifth, the potential impact of the Nordic cultural context on emotion socialization is discussed. Finally, the objectives of the present thesis are presented.
A Theoretical Framework of Emotion Socialization
In 1998, Nancy Eisenberg, Amanda Cumberland and Tracy Spinrad aimed to summarize and review the existing literature on emotion socialization. Based on their review, they formulated a heuristic model suggesting that children’s emotional competence develops through a process of parental socialization. Socialization, in broader terms, involves a variety of outcomes (e.g.,
acquisition of roles and rules across social, personal, cognitive, and emotional domains), and refers to a bi-directional process where new members of a social group (i.e., children) are assisted by
17
socialization agents (i.e., parents, peers or teachers) to become members of that particular social group (Grusec & Hastings, 2015).
Eisenberg et al. (1998) identified three main categories of parental ERSBs that influence children’s emotional competence: a) parental reactions to children’s emotions, b) parental discussion of emotions, and c) parental expression of emotion. Eisenberg’s et al. (1998) heuristic model of the socialization of emotion is presented in Figure 1.
Figure 1
A heuristic model of the socialization of emotion
Note. Reprinted with permission.
In the emotion socialization literature, parental reactions to children’s emotions are typically described as either supportive or non-supportive (Eisenberg et al., 1998; Fabes et al., 2002; Johnson et al., 2017), or as emotion coaching or emotion dismissive (Gottman et al., 1996; Havighurst &
Harley, 2007; Katz et al., 2012). Supportive ERSBs include parental emotion-focused and problem-
18
focused reactions, and parental expressive encouragement. Emotion-focused reactions involve addressing the child’s emotion with either comfort, coping statements or distraction. Problem- focused reactions entail helping the child to solve concrete problems that are causing emotional distress. Expressive encouragement involves invitations to express emotions. Non-supportive ERSBs include parental minimization, punitive reactions and distress reactions (Fabes et al., 1990; Fabes et al., 2002). Minimization (e.g., belittling the child’s negative emotions) and punitive reactions (e.g., punishing the child for negative emotional expressions) are measures of parenting behaviors, whereas parental distress is related to internal empathic overarousal (Eisenberg & Fabes, 1994).
In the next section I will present the concept of emotion coaching and explain how this construct differs from supportive responses and parental warmth. The emotion coaching construct was developed after Eisenberg’s et al. (1998) seminal article, and now the research field has moved forward (Eisenberg, 2020; Spinrad et al., 2020). However, a debate is evidenced in emotion socialization literature (Jespersen et al., 2021) regarding how to conceptualize, integrate, and operationalize important supportive and emotion coaching concepts.
Parental Meta-Emotion Philosophy (PMEP) framework
In contrast to earlier studies in the parenting literature, which at the time primarily focused on parental warmth and control, and attachment sensitivity and responsiveness (Ainsworth et al., 1971;
Baumrind, 1966, 1978; Cassidy et al., 1992; Cowan & Cowan, 1992; Maccoby & Martin, 1983), John Gottman, Lynn Fainsilber Katz and Carole Hooven (1996) explored parental emotional awareness and coaching of emotions in children. They were inspired by the child psychologist Haim Ginnot who underscored the importance of validating children’s emotions and avoiding contempt and
disapproval when children were experiencing negative emotions (Ginnot, 1965, 1971).
PMEP refers to a system of parental beliefs, thoughts, and feelings about emotions, as well as parental beliefs specifically about children’s emotions (Gottman et al., 1996). Meta-emotions are analogous to meta-cognitions in meta-cognitive therapy (Wells, 2009), and similar to the notion of
19
secondary emotions in emotion-focused therapy (Greenberg, 2015), and can thus be described as emotions about emotions (Gottman et al., 1997). In a now classic study in emotion socialization literature, Gottman et al. identified four parenting styles or parental meta-emotion philosophies, labeled disapproving, dismissive, laissez-faire and emotion coaching (Gottman & Declaire, 1997;
Gottman et al., 1996, 1997). Disapproving parents’ attitudes towards emotions were characterized by derogatory or threatening statements, and these parents did not want their children to express negative emotions. Dismissive parents, on the other hand, were more often warm and sensitive, but were less inclined to explore children’s emotional experiences and more inclined to dismiss or avoid children’s emotions. A third group of parents were neither disapproving nor dismissive of emotions in children. These laissez-faire parents accepted emotional expressions in children but did not set limits or problem-solve. Finally, emotion coaching parents viewed negative emotional expressions in children as opportunities for intimacy and teaching. These parents assumed that negative emotions conveyed important information, for example that something was missing in one’s personal life and needed attention. They were more aware of emotions, better able to differentiate negative
emotions in themselves and in their children, and validated emotions and coached children through their negative emotional experiences (Gottman & Declaire, 1997).
In mainstream parenting literature and in parenting interventions (e.g., Tuning in to Kids (TIK);
Havighurst & Harley, 2007; Gottman & Declaire, 1997), the term parenting styles is used when referring to emotion coaching or dismissive parenting. These parenting styles are however different from Diana Baumrind’s (1966, 1978) parenting styles based on dimensions of warmth and control.
Gottman et al. (1996) found that warm parents also could be dismissive of emotions (e.g., respond with distraction or cheerfulness when the child is upset), and suggested that an emotion-coaching PMEP added an emotional awareness component to the concept of parenting styles. Furthermore, PMEP is not a fixed style of parenting. It may vary over time, from situation to situation, and from one emotion to another (Gottman et al., 1997). A mother may for example respond with emotion coaching when her daughter feels sad, but with dismissiveness when the daughter is angry.
20
In a sample of 56 parents and their 5-year-old children in normally developing families, Gottman et al. (1996) investigated how PMEP was related to child outcomes, specifically child physiological functioning, regulation, illness, academic achievement and teacher ratings of peer aggression. They combined observation of families, parental meta-emotion interviews, direct assessment, self-report, and physiological measures in a longitudinal design, following children from 5 to 8 years of age. They found that children of emotion coaching parents had significantly lower levels of externalizing behavior problems, better inhibitory control, physical health and academic achievement, and that parental emotion coaching at age 5 significantly predicted better social adjustment in peer interactions at age 8.
What children learned through emotion coaching was not simply modeling of emotion-related social skills (Gottman et al., 1996). The researchers concluded that through parental emotion coaching children learned to skillfully handle difficult emotionally charged situations even when the situation called for hiding or inhibiting emotional responses (Gottman et al., 1996). Socially
acceptable coping with emotions in the schoolyard, for example, often involved acting cool and not displaying emotions, whereas parents’ emotion coaching behaviors involved the opposite, namely displaying and talking about emotions. It was therefore hypothesized that emotion coaching contributed to the development of emotional competence in children, helping children to
understand emotions at a deeper level than modelling, and to regulate and express emotions and guiding socially appropriate behavior (Denham et al., 2015; Gottman et al., 1996; Katz et al., 2012).
Lynn Fainsilber Katz et al. (2012) reviewed research on PMEP, and formulated a theoretical model capturing this relationship between parental emotion coaching, children’s emotional competence, and social adjustment and peer relations. In this model, parents’ PMEP was operationalized as parental awareness, acceptance and coaching of emotion (see Figure 2).
Figure 2
The PMEP theoretical framework
21 Note. Reprinted with permission.
The PMEP model adds to the literature in three important ways (Katz et al., 2012). First, it underscores the role of parents’ own beliefs, thoughts, and attitudes about emotions as important predictors of parental behaviors. Second, the PMEP construct contributes by highlighting the positive relationship between parents’ thoughts and feelings about their own emotions, and their thoughts and feelings about their children’s emotions. Third, parental awareness, acceptance and coaching of emotions are identified as central components of PMEP (Gottman et al., 1996; Katz et al., 2012).
In sum, research suggests that when children grow up in families where emotions are labeled, validated, discussed and expressed in well-regulated and socially appropriate manners, this positively facilitates the development of their emotional competence and social adjustment (Cunningham et al., 2009; Denham et al., 2015; Di Giunta et al., 2020; Dunsmore & Halberstadt, 1997; Eisenberg et al., 1998; Gao & Han, 2016; Gottman et al., 1996; Hajal & Paley, 2020;
Halberstadt & Eaton, 2002; Johnson et al., 2017; Morris et al., 2007; Spinrad et al., 2020). In the following section I will present two commonly studied child outcomes found in emotion socialization literature, namely emotion understanding and externalizing behavior problems.
22 Child outcomes
Emotion socialization theory and the PMEP theoretical framework suggests a link between parental ERSBs, children’s emotional competence and children’s adjustment (Eisenberg, 2020;
Eisenberg et al., 1998; Gottman et al., 1996; Johnson et al., 2017; Morris et al., 2007; Spinrad et al., 2020). Emotion understanding is one important component of emotional competence in addition to emotional expressiveness and emotion regulation (Denham et al., 2015; Denham et al., 2003;
Denham & Kochanoff, 2002; Denham et al., 1994; Eisenberg et al., 1998; Fabes et al., 2002;
Havighurst et al., 2015; Katz et al., 2012) and has been the primary focus in emotion socialization literature (Morris et al., 2007). When conducting emotion socialization research for the first time in a Nordic cultural context, it was therefore natural to include emotion understanding as an outcome measure. In the relevant literature, parental emotion socialization is strongly related to children’s emotion understanding (Denham et al., 2015; Eisenberg et al., 1998). Moreover, previous studies have found that emotion understanding is readily learned through labeling and parent-child discussion of emotion with positive effects on children’s emotional knowledge after parents have participated in parenting interventions (Aznar & Tenenbaum, 2013; Havighurst et al., 2012;
Havighurst et al., 2013; Havighurst et al., 2010; Salmon et al., 2013; Salmon & Reese, 2016; Van Bergen et al., 2009). Emotion understanding was thus included as an outcome measure in the present thesis.
Emotion understanding in children
Previous studies establishing a link between parental ERSBs and children’s emotion
understanding, typically used the Denham (1986) puppet task to assess emotion understanding in kindergarten-aged children. This procedure is sometimes also referred to as the Emotion Skills Task, Affective Knowledge Test or simply the puppet interview (Morgan et al., 2010). In the present thesis, the Test of Emotion Comprehension (The TEC; Pons & Harris, 2000) was used instead because it can identify age-related development of emotion understanding. In addition, the TEC is highly
standardized and easy to administer. According to Pons’ et al. (2004) theory of emotion
23
comprehension, emotion understanding develops through a series of three partly overlapping phases during childhood: the external, the mental, and the reflective phases (Harris, 1994; Harris et al., 1989; Kockeritz et al., 2010; Pons & Harris, 2005; Pons et al., 2004; Sprung et al., 2015; Strand et al., 2015). The TEC measures these phases of development of emotion understanding.
According to Pons’ et al. (2004) theory of emotion comprehension, the external phase of emotion understanding is comprised of three developmental components: Recognition of emotion labels, realizing that emotions can be elicited by an external cause and that emotions can be elicited by desire (Pons et al., 2004). Research shows that children learn to recognize, differentiate and name basic emotions by approximately 3 to 4 years of age (Bullock & Russell, 1985; Denham, 1986).
By 3 to 5 years of age, children begin to understand that people’s emotional reactions can be elicited by an external cause or depend on what they desire (Cutting & Dunn, 1999; Harris et al., 1989). For example, children begin to understand that sadness may follow from the loss of a toy, or that happiness may follow from pleasant experiences.
The second phase of emotion understanding, the mental phase, consists of three components:
Belief, reminder and regulation (Pons et al., 2004). From 4 to 6 years of age children begin to understand that other people’s beliefs – whether true or false – can impact their emotions (de Rosnay et al., 2004). At the same age they also begin to understand that an object or an image (e.g., a dead or missing pet) can act as a reminder to evoke an emotional reaction (Harris, 1989). From ages 6 to 7, children develop a rudimentary understanding that emotions can be regulated using psychological strategies (i.e. denial, distraction, reappraisal) or behavioral strategies (i.e. looking away or hitting; Band & Weisz, 1988). During this phase children start to understand, for example, that sadness might follow from being reminded of a dead pet and that negative emotions can be regulated by thoughts.
In the third phase of children’s emotional development, the reflective phase, the three more advanced components develop: Hiding, mixed emotions and morality (Pons et al., 2004). Between 4
24
to 6 years of age, children develop an understanding that people sometimes hide their emotions, experience mixed emotions (e.g., excitement and fear simultaneously) or that emotions can be influenced by moral judgement (Brown & Dunn, 1996; Gardner et al., 1988; Lake et al., 1995; Tang et al., 2018). For example, children develop an understanding that people sometimes hide feelings from public display, or that feelings of guilt or shame may arise from getting caught stealing a cookie.
By differentiating between developmental periods, we may increase our knowledge on how to promote the development of children’s emotion understanding (i.e., using the TEC; Pons & Harris, 2000). Only one previous study has investigated the effect of parental ERSBs on all three phases of emotion understanding. In a sample of 75 Portuguese 3- to 6-year-old children and their fathers, the researchers found evidence of a significant negative association between fathers’ distress reactions and children’s total TEC scores (Chora et al., 2019).
According to the emotion socialization and the PMEP theoretical framework (Eisenberg et al., 1998; Katz et al., 2012), emotion understanding mediates the effect of parental ERSBs on
externalizing behavior problems with a few studies beginning to show this (Cunningham et al., 2009;
Gottman et al., 1996; Strand et al., 2015). In the following sections I will present research linking parental ERSBs to emotion understanding and externalizing behavior problems in children.
Externalizing behavior problems
The first study to test the assumption that children’s emotional competence mediated the relationship between parental ERSBs and externalizing behavior problems was Gottman’s et al.
(1996) original study, finding support for the mediation hypothesis. Cunningham et al. (2009) also found support for the mediation hypothesis in a sample of 69 urban African American families with a child in middle childhood (M = 11.29 years). In girls, emotion understanding mediated the
relationship between parental ERSBs and children’s social skills. In boys, emotion understanding mediated the relationship between parental ERSBs and children’s internalizing behaviors. In a similar
25
study, Strand et al. (2015) found support for the mediation hypothesis in a cross-cultural study of emotion understanding in 281 preschoolers (159 boys; M age = 4 years) from English (N = 158) and Spanish-speaking (N = 123) samples. They found evidence of a stronger and more complex bi- directional relationship between child emotion understanding and behavior problems for Spanish- speaking girls compared to boys and for all English-speaking children. These studies thus provide some support for the mediation hypothesis of the PMEP theoretical framework.
The link between parental ERSBs and externalizing behavior problems in kindergarten children is well established in emotion socialization literature (Eisenberg et al., 1998; Johnson et al., 2017;
Spinrad et al., 2020). It strongly suggests that children growing up in families where emotions are labeled, validated, discussed and expressed in well-regulated and socially appropriate ways, tend to have better socioemotional adjustment and fewer internalizing and externalizing behavior problems (Eisenberg et al., 1998; Gottman et al., 1996; Hajal & Paley, 2020; Johnson et al., 2017; Morris et al., 2007; Spinrad et al., 2020).
Johnson et al. (2017) conducted a meta-analysis of 49 studies (n = 6270) showing small, but statistically significant, sizes of effect with non-supportive ERSBs having a greater contribution to externalizing behavior problems (r =.13) than supportive ERSBs (r =-.06). There are, however, some interesting studies suggesting that this relationship is not as straight forward as previously
documented, indicating that the effect of parental ERSBs on externalizing behavior problems change in the transition from kindergarten to school ;ĂƌĚĂĐŬΘKďƌĂĚŽǀŝđ͕ϮϬϭϳ͖EĞůƐŽŶΘŽLJĞƌ͕ϮϬϭϴͿ.
Nelson and Boyer (2018), for example, found an effect of age on the relationship between maternal non-supportive ERSBs and externalizing behavior problems in a sample of 62 5-year-olds, 75 6-year- olds and 50 7-year-old children. In 5-year-old children, there was a positive association between non-supportive ERSBs and externalizing behavior problems, but not in 6-year-old children. In this age group there was no significant association. In 7-year-old children, however, they found that non- supportive maternal ERSBs were negatively related to externalizing behavior problems. In other
26
words, the less emotional support children received from their mothers, the more well behaved the were at school. Nelson and Boyer (2018) hesitate to suggest that minimizing children’s emotions and punishing them for expressing negative emotions is a positive parenting strategy even for older children. Instead, they suggest that for older children, these dismissive messages likely convey a message to cope independently with difficult emotions rather than being insensitive to the child’s needs. This study represents an important first step in exploring this developmental shift in the relationship between maternal ERSBs and changes in children’s externalizing behaviors but more research is needed to further differentiate developmentally appropriate parental coping responses from emotionally dismissive responses for school-aged children (Nelson & Boyer, 2018).
In a similar study, ĂƌĚĂĐŬĂŶĚKďƌĂĚŽǀŝđ;ϮϬϭϳͿ compared parental ERSBs and teacher
closeness in a diverse community sample of 89 4- to 6-year-old American children, and found results inconsistent with previous research on emotion socialization. Girls who were rated as more
relationally aggressive towards peers had better teacher-child relationships when parents were emotionally non-supportive (i.e., minimizing) than when parents were supportive. According to the researchers, high parent minimization protected children against the negative effects of early aggressive behaviors on teacher–child closeness. The authors conclude that their findings challenge the notion of universally supportive and unsupportive parent emotion socialization practices, but that more research is needed to explore these associations.
In sum, previous research findings have linked parental ERSBs to emotion understanding and externalizing behavior problems in kindergarten-aged children (Denham et al., 2015; Eisenberg et al., 1998; Johnson et al., 2017). Yet as children grow older these relationships become more complex as other socialization agents (e.g., peers and teachers) become increasingly important (Bardack &
KďƌĂĚŽǀŝđ͕ϮϬϭϳ͖ĞŶŚĂŵĞƚĂů͕͘ϮϬϭϱ͖EĞůƐŽŶΘŽLJĞƌ͕ϮϬϭϴͿ.
Early studies in on emotion socialization mainly involved mothers and very few included fathers (Eisenberg, 2020; Eisenberg et al., 1998). Recent studies have started to include both parents in
27
emotion socialization research, showing that both parents’ ERSBs are significant predictors of child outcomes (Aznar & Tenenbaum, 2013; Baker et al., 2011; Boldt et al., 2020; Di Giunta et al., 2020;
Lunkenheimer et al., 2020; Miller-Slough et al., 2018; Shewark & Blandon, 2015). However, very few studies have applied a family systems perspective in the data analysis, investigating how
combinations of maternal and paternal ERSBs lead to child outcomes (McElwain et al., 2007; Miller- Slough et al., 2018; Poon et al., 2017). Applying a family systems perspective, researchers can examine how, for example, having a non-supportive father and a supportive mother is related to externalizing behavior problems in children.
A family systems perspective on emotion socialization
Both parents should be included in emotion socialization research, as mothers and fathers may influence children differently. Mothers, for example, tend to be more emotionally expressive and children tend to rely more on mothers for emotional support than fathers (Halberstadt et al., 1995;
Lieberman et al., 1999). Fathers, on the other hand, tend to be more active, arousal- and play- oriented (Parke, 1996) and differentiate their responses to girls’ and boys’ emotions more than mothers do (Chaplin et al., 2005). Emotion socialization research should therefore include mothers and fathers, applying a family systems perspective to investigate how maternal and paternal ERSBs interact to produce child outcomes (McElwain et al., 2007). The family systems perspective
originates from family therapy research (e.g. Bowen, 1978; Minuchin & Nichols, 1998) and suggests that behavior of one member of the family (i.e. the father) is counter-balanced by other family members’ (i.e. the mother) complementary behaviors (Jackson, 1965; Watzlawick et al., 1967).
McElwain et al. (2007) proposed a method for investigating how maternal and paternal ERSBs worked in tandem as predictors of child outcomes. They used moderation analysis to test three different models: an additive, a buffering and a divergence model (see Figure 3). The additive model suggests that the effect of having one highly supportive mother in combination with a highly
supportive father adds up in a cumulative fashion. The buffering model suggests that support from
28
one parent can buffer or compensate for the lack of support from the other parent, and the divergence model suggests, as indicated by the crossover effect in Figure 2c, that children benefit from having one parent who is high in support and one who is low in support (McElwain et al., 2007). McElwain et al. (2007) found support for the divergence hypothesis in two studies on
children’s emotion understanding and friendship quality. The results suggested that children become more attuned to and better able to manage interpersonal conflict when parents differ in their responses to children’s emotions. In conclusion, the authors state that the results remain tentative pending further investigation.
As mentioned above, a widely studied child outcome in the emotion socialization literature is externalizing behavior problems in children, and an extant amount of evidence has linked parental ERSBs to externalizing behavior problems (Chaplin et al., 2005; Cunningham et al., 2009; Di Giunta et al., 2020; Eisenberg et al., 1998; Eisenberg et al., 1999; Havighurst et al., 2015; Johnson et al., 2017;
Mackler et al., 2015; Mirabile, 2014; Morris et al., 2007; Nelson & Boyer, 2018; Yu et al., 2015).
However, not many studies have tested the additive, buffering and divergence models on parental ERSBs and externalizing behavior problems (Miller-Slough et al., 2018; Poon et al., 2017). No studies have investigated divergence effects on kindergarten aged children’s externalizing behavior
problems. The current thesis therefore further investigates the relationship between parental ERSBs, emotion understanding and externalizing behavior problems in kindergarten children, applying a family systems perspective.
29 Figure 3
Hypothetical associations for the three models of maternal and paternal emotion socialization
Note. Reprinted with permission.
Cross-cultural studies on emotion socialization have shown results inconsistent with findings from the North American emotion socialization literature (Cole & Tan, 2015). This underscores the need to investigate emotion socialization in diverse cultural contexts (Raval & Walker, 2019). In the following section, I will therefore present the Nordic sociopolitical and cultural and context.
30 The Nordic Cultural Context
In years following the Second World War, Social Democratic parties were highly successful in national and municipal elections and reached near hegemony in the Nordic countries, having a great impact on political trends and policies up to the present day (Telhaug et al., 2004). These economic and political policies are commonly referred to as the Nordic model (Andersen et al., 2007), and set Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, and Iceland apart from other WEIRD (White, Educated,
Industrialized, Rich and Democratic) countries (Henrich et al., 2010). The Nordic model combines an open and well-functioning market economy with a large public sector and a comprehensive welfare state, a shared characteristic of all five Nordic countries (Andersen et al., 2007). The Nordic model is costly, with tax pressures approaching 50% on family income (Datta Gupta et al., 2006). In return, Nordic parents receive substantially more economic support post-partum through the welfare system than parents in the USA, including a year of parental leave shared between parents, and essentially universal access to affordable child care (Zachrisson & Dearing, 2015). The Nordic countries and the USA have been described as worlds apart when it comes to father- and family- friendly policy schemes (Rush, 2015). These family-friendly policies may contribute to strengthening attachment bonds and supportive ERSBs in early childhood, particularly in fathers who spend more time with their children (Cassidy et al., 2011; Dagan & Sagi-Schwartz, 2018; Eisenberg et al., 1998).
Fathers in the Nordic countries have greater access to longer periods of paternity leave, contributing to a boost in fathers’ practical and emotional investment in infant care (O'Brien et al., 2007). The current thesis includes samples from Norway. In 2018, 71% of all Norwegian fathers spent 14 weeks or more on paternity leave with their newborn babies (SSB, 2019).
Childcare is a priority for the Norwegian government with significant efforts in the last 20 years to ensure all children can attend kindergarten (Regjeringen, 2004). In 2003 the Norwegian
government introduced a plan with substantial governmental funding to make both public (46%) and private (54%) kindergartens available for all children aged 1 to 5 at a fixed, universal, and affordable price (Regjeringen, 2004; Utdanningsdirektoratet, 2017). These kindergartens typically provide
31
daycare in combination with a play-based, holistic approach to learning (Hansen & Alvestad, 2018).
In 2020, 85.4% of Norwegian children aged 1 to 2 and 97.3% of children aged 3 to 5 attended subsidized, government regulated kindergartens (SSB, 2021), spending on average 35 hours per week in kindergartens (Haug & Storø, 2013).
There is a debate as to whether universal access to subsidized childcare in early childhood is related to more externalizing problems in children (Dearing & Zachrisson, 2017). A study of 1,157 Norwegian kindergarten children aged 2 to 4 found that teacher-rated behavior problems increased for boys who were exposed to a peer group with two or more externalizing children (Ribeiro &
Zachrisson, 2017). However, in a population-based study of 1- to 3-year-old children in Norwegian high-quality kindergartens (n = 75721), there was no evidence that kindergarten attendance caused externalizing problems in children (Zachrisson et al., 2013), and there is now a general consensus about the positive effects of high quality childcare in Norway, particularly for low SES children, although recent research suggest that the ambition of universal access to high quality kindergartens is not entirely realized in Norway (Alexandersen et al., 2021). Likewise, the prevalence of
diagnosable externalizing problems is lower in Norway and the Nordic countries compared to other European countries and the US, with estimates of 1.7% prevalence for conduct disorders and 1.8%
for oppositional defiant disorders (Skogen & Torvik, 2013). There is thus little evidence that universal access to subsidized childcare is related to increased externalizing problems in Nordic children.
The interest in emotion-focused therapy and parenting interventions has grown in the Nordic countries over the past years (Ansar et al., 2021; Wilhelmsen-Langeland et al., 2020). Norwegian parents of school-aged kids participating in emotion focused skills training (EFST) reported an increase in parenting satisfaction and a reduction in externalizing behavior problems post-
intervention (Ansar et al., 2021; Wilhelmsen-Langeland et al., 2020). Also, emotion understanding in Norwegian kindergarten children has been linked to parental mentalization, SES and child outcomes (Kårstad et al., 2014; Kårstad et al., 2016; Kårstad et al., 2015; Skalická et al., 2019). No studies have
32
however focused specifically on emotion-socialization in kindergarten-aged children. The present thesis is the first to investigate the relationship between parental ERSBs and children’s emotion understanding and externalizing behavior problems in kindergarten children within a Nordic cultural context.
Aims
Paper 1 aimed to investigate how parental ERSBs worked separately and in tandem as predictors of externalizing behavior problems, testing the additive, buffering and divergence models. The first hypothesis was that parental supportive ERSBs negatively and non-supportive ERSBs positively predicted externalizing problems. The second hypothesis was that parental ERSBs worked in tandem and jointly contributed to externalizing behavior problems in children.
Paper 2 aimed to test the PMEP model. It was hypothesized that the effect of parental ERSBs on externalizing behavior problems was mediated through children’s emotion understanding.
Paper 3 aimed to examine whether a parenting intervention (i.e., N-TIK) that enhanced parental ERSBs led to changes in children’s external, mental, reflective, and total emotion understanding. An intervention design was used to increase supportive and decrease non-supportive responses in participating parents. It was hypothesized that enhanced parental ERSBs would lead to an improvement in emotion understanding in children.
Method Participants and procedure
The present thesis consists of data collected in two samples. Participants and procedure are presented separately for each paper. No participants were excluded based on language proficiency.
33 Paper I
Paper I included participants from the first wave of the Norwegian Tuning in to Kids (N-TIK) Effectiveness Study (Clinical Trials: NCT04651465), and included data from both parents and kindergarten teachers of 3- to 5-year-old children (born 2012-2013).
Participants included 425 parents (M = 38 years, SD = 4.50; 42.70% fathers), 257 3- to 5-year-old children (M = 54 months, SD = 4.54; 49% boys), and 117 kindergarten teachers (92.3 % female teachers). Participants were informed about the study via Childcare Centers and Municipality Health Care Services. The centers were approached by the research team with a phone call followed by an email that contained information about the study in an electronic format. Centers consenting to participate in the study forwarded information letters to parents of 3- to 5-year-old children. Parents expressed interest in participating in the study by returning an expression of interest (included in the information letter) via email. Interested parents were emailed further written information about the study, including a written consent form. Parents were asked to consent on behalf of themselves as well as their children. Kindergarten teachers were also invited to participate, answering
questionnaires about the child. Written information about the study including consent forms were sent to the childcare centers and returned by email. Once returned, children, parents and
kindergarten teachers were officially enrolled in the study. Enrolled consenting parents and teachers were sent an email with a link to a baseline assessment questionnaire (University of Oslo’s
Nettskjema). Responses to questionnaires were stored automatically on a secure digital platform (University of Oslo’s Services for Sensitive Data, TSD).
Paper II
Participants in paper II and III were recruited from the N-TIK pilot study (Clinical Trials:
NCT04851704), and consisted of a sample of 40 children (M age = 5.91 years, SD = .32, boys n = 21) recruited in their final year of kindergarten including one of their parents (M age = 42.05 SD = 4.55, fathers n = 10). Parents and children were invited to participate using the same procedure as in
34
paper I. Children were assessed for emotion understanding at the University of Oslo by the research team. Parents completed online questionnaires while waiting. The assessment took approximately one-and-a-half hours.
Paper III
Paper III used a 2 x 2 intervention design as part of the N-TIK pilot study (Clinical Trials:
NCT04851704). Paper III used data from the same sample as paper II in addition to follow-up data collected using the same procedure 6 months after baseline assessment was conducted. Parents in the intervention condition were offered to participate in the TIK parenting program after the baseline assessment was completed. Control participants were offered the intervention after the 6- month follow-up assessment was completed.
The TIK intervention. The TIK intervention is an emotion-focused parenting program for
universal delivery to groups of parents of normally developing children (Havighurst & Harley, 2007).
The main aims of the intervention are to promote parental emotion coaching, reduce emotional dismissiveness, and to encourage emotion talk in families (Havighurst & Kehoe, 2021). The TIK program was delivered weekly over a period of 6 to 8 weeks using a structured manual that specified and described 6 structured group sessions. Each session included: Home activity review, agenda setting, a warm-up exercise, opportunities for parents to share experiences over the last week, group activities and new homework assignments. Group activities consisted of psychoeducation, reflective exercises, and emotion coaching/dismissive role plays. For example, a typical group session could include a warm-up mindfulness exercise, a review of the emotion diary homework assignment and sharing of experiences over the last week, followed by a role play of emotion coaching and dismissive responses.
Ethics
The study in paper I was approved by the Ethics Committee at the Department of Psychology, University of Oslo (1471656) and the Norwegian Centre for Research Data (NSD), which approved
35
processing and storage of personal data (NSD: 51496). Paper II & III, which included direct assessments of child behavior, was approved by the Regional Committees for Medical and Health Research Ethics (REK: 2015/2383). When testing children, we made sure that both parents and children was aware that testing was voluntary. Some parents were eager to see their child complete testing even though their child objected. In these cases, we did not pressure the children into participation, but instead suggested ending the test. To minimize the burden of participating in research, we specifically excluded questionnaires that might be experienced as pathologizing, and TIK groups were conducted with a normalizing, non-confronting, supportive attitude toward parents.
When recruiting parents to participate in the N-TIK effectiveness trial, I was contacted by many parents asking questions about topics that were already explained in the information letters. This led me to wonder how informed their consent was. No single theory explains how parents make
decisions about participating in research (Moilanen, 2015). I suspect many parents participated in the N-TIK effectiveness trial motivated by participation in the intervention group rather than contributing to this research. This is because one typical question I received by email concerned assignment to intervention or control conditions. This process was well described in the information letters, leading me to believe that parents either had not taken the time to read these notifications properly, or that their main interest in participating was help for themselves in their roles as parents or help for their children (i.e., participating in the TIK intervention, not in the filling out of
questionnaires). I have not been able to ascertain the numbers that were interested in research on the one hand or primarily seeking help on the other. In any case, it would have been ethically problematic to hinder help-seeking parents from going elsewhere to get it. We therefore did not prevent control parents from seeking help elsewhere but included a question in the follow-up questionnaire asking parents to indicate whether they had received help in the period from baseline to follow-up. Using an active control group could have solved this ethical problem, but introduces new methodological dilemmas (Boot et al., 2013). We therefore landed on this solution.
36 Measures
The Coping with Children’s Negative Emotions Scale (CCNES). Parental ERSBs were measured by self-reporting, using the Norwegian translation of the CCNES (Fabes et al., 1990). The CCNES was translated to Norwegian for the purpose of this study and back translated to English and
proofreading by bilingual scholars. The CCNES measures parental reactions to children’s negative emotions on a 72-item self-report scale. Parents were presented with 12 scenarios. Parents were asked to rate how likely it was that he/she would react in everyday parenting scenarios on a 7-point Likert scale with six different reactions corresponding to each of the CCNES subscales: Distress Reactions (DR), Punitive Reactions (PR), Expressive Encouragement (EE), Emotion-Focused Reactions (EFR), Problem-Focused Reactions (PFR) or Minimization Reactions (MR). The non-supportive CCNES scale consisted of DR, MR and PR subscales, and the supportive scale comprised of EE, PFR and EFR subscales (Fabes et al., 2002).
The Test of Emotion Comprehension (TEC). The TEC is a direct assessment measure of child emotion understanding (Pons & Harris, 2000) made available in Norwegian (Kårstad et al., 2015).
The TEC includes a picture book (one for boys and one for girls) with cartoon scenarios accompanied by scripted stories that the experimenter reads out loud (see Figures 4 and 5).
The TEC was used to measure nine components of emotion understanding: 1) emotion recognition, 2) external cause, 3) desire, 4) belief, 5) reminder, 6) regulation, 7) hidden, 8) mixed, and 9) morally based emotions. For each component, the child is presented with one or more narratives corresponding to the drawing in the picture book, and the child is asked to indicate the protagonist’s emotion by pointing to one of four facial displays of emotion. The emotion alternatives include two pleasant emotions (happy and all right) and two unpleasant emotions (either scared, angry, or sad).
37 Figure 4
The TEC picture book. Component 5 (emotional reminder) is assessed on page 17.
For example, the experimenter reads aloud a story about a boy or girl (depending on the child’s gender) whose rabbit died. The experimenter explains that the child was reminded about the dead pet after seeing a picture of the rabbit in a photo album. After hearing the story, the child is asked to point to the emotion of the boy or girl who was reminded of the dead rabbit. Four emotion
alternatives are presented underneath each cartoon scenario in each component, in this case happy, all right, scared, and sad.
The TEC includes four composite scales: The TEC external (comprised of component 1-3), the TEC mental (including components 4-6), the TEC reflective (comprised of components 7-9), and the TEC emotion scale (includes all nine components). Success on one component yields 1 point, resulting in a maximum score of 3 and a minimum score of 0 on each phase of development.
38 Figure 5
An illustration of TEC components and examples of cartoon scenarios (component 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9) and response items (component 1, 6).
Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence – third edition (WPPSI-III). Two subscales from the Norwegian version of the WPPSI-III, similarities and matrix reasoning were included to control for verbal and non-verbal intelligence when investigating emotion understanding in children (Wechsler, 2003).
Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory 6 (ECBI). Children’s externalizing behavior problems were assessed using the Norwegian version of the ECBI (Eyberg & Pincus, 1999; Reedtz et al., 2008).
Parents responded to 36 items rating children’s behavior on a seven-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 7 (always). The ECBI is widely used, and is a psychometrically strong scale of externalizing
behavior problems (Burns & Patterson, 2000). The Norwegian version of the test also has good psychometric qualities (Reedtz et al., 2008).
39
The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). The SDQ is a 25-item questionnaire with five subscales assessing child emotional adjustment, conduct problems, problems with inattention and hyperactivity, prosocial child behavior and peer relationships (Goodman, 2001). Items are scored on a 3-point Likert scale from 1 (not true) to 3 (certainly true). The SDQ conduct scale adapted from the Norwegian version of the SDQ was used as a measure of teacher-reported externalizing behavior problems (Heiervang et al., 2007).
SES. SES was assessed using self-report. Parents indicated their level of education on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (nine years of primary school) to 5 (college/university degree of four years or more). Family financial status was measured by parental report on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (we are doing very poorly) to 5 (we are doing very well).
Statistical analyses
Data analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS version 27 in paper I & III, and version 25 in paper II (IBM Corp, 2017, 2020). Data were screened (inspecting accuracy of inputs, handling missing data, outliers, non-normality, non-linearity and evaluating multicollinearity) prior to analysis according to the guidelines of Tabachnick and Fidell (2013). Power was calculated post-hoc using G*Power version 3.1.9.4 and version 3.1.9.7 (Faul et al., 2007). Main data analyses included regression, moderation and mediation analyses, and multilevel modeling (Field, 2013; Hayes, 2018; Heck et al., 2014). Moderation and mediation analyses were conducted using Hayes’ (2018) PROCESS plug-in version 3.0 and version 3.5 in IBM SPSS (Hayes, 2018). Multilevel modeling was conducted using Mixed Models in IBM SPSS (Heck et al., 2014).
In paper I, regression and moderation analysis were used to investigate separate and joint contributions of maternal and paternal ERSBs on externalizing behavior problems in children (McElwain et al., 2007).
In paper II, regression and mediation were used to investigate the relationship between parental ERSBs, emotion understanding, and externalizing behavior problems in children. Hayes PROCESS
40
plug-in was used to conduct the mediation analysis (Hayes, 2018). According to Baron and Kenny (1986) the first step of a mediation analysis is to establish a significant relationship between
predictor (X) and outcome (Y) variables. However, many meaningful associations are confounded by third variables, camouflaging the effect of X on Y, and Andrew Hayes (2018) therefore developed more advanced statistical methods to address such problems (i.e., conditional process analysis).
Thus, conditional process analysis was selected instead of the causal steps approach suggested by Baron and Kenny (1986) because this method can be used with uncorrelated X and Y variables. In addition, conditional process analysis provides an estimate of the mediated effect, whereas the traditional approach to mediation analysis did not allow for a quantification of the mediation.
In paper III, multilevel modelling was used to evaluate the effect of the intervention and to predict children’s emotion understanding from enhanced parental ERSBs (Heck et al., 2014). Cohen’s d was calculated using independent-groups pretest-posttest design (IGPP) formula for multilevel analyses (Feingold, 2009). Multilevel Modeling was used to handle possible nesting of data in kindergartens.
Results
Summary of paper I: When two become one: Maternal and paternal emotion-related socialization behaviors interacting as predictors of externalizing behavior problems in kindergarten children.
In paper I, the main aim was to replicate previous findings from emotion socialization research in the Nordic cultural context and to investigate whether maternal and paternal ERSBs worked
separately and in tandem as predictors of teacher-rated child externalizing behavior problems.
Results supported our hypothesis that parental ERSBs predicted externalizing behavior problems in a sample of Norwegian children. We also found support for our hypothesis that maternal and paternal ERSBs interacted and jointly contributed to externalizing behavior problems.
MĂƚĞƌŶĂůƐƵƉƉŽƌƚŝǀĞ;ɴс-.14; p < .05) and non-supportive ERSBs ;ɴс͘Ϯϵ͖p < .001) contributed to mother-rated externalizing behavior problems. Paternal non-supportive ERSBs significantly
41
contributed to father-ƌĂƚĞĚĞdžƚĞƌŶĂůŝnjŝŶŐďĞŚĂǀŝŽƌƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ;ɴс͘Ϯϱ͖p < .001) and was also positively related to teacher-rated externalizing behavior problems (r = .20; p < .01).
One of the joint contribution models was significant (model 2; p = .039), showing a statistically significant interaction between maternal supportive ERSBs and paternal non-supportive ERSBs (p = .036) on teacher-rated externalizing behavior in children. When mothers reported low levels of supportive ERSBs (b = -.21, p = .661) there was no effect of paternal non-support on externalizing child behavior problems. However, when maternal supportive ERSBs were moderate (b = .59, p = .043) or high (b = 1.13, p = .004), a positive relationship was seen between paternal non-supportive reactions and children’s externalizing problems.
Summary of paper II - Pathways to behavior problems in Norwegian Kindergarten Children: The role of parent emotion socialization and child emotion understanding.
In paper II, the main aim was to test the PMEP model and investigate whether child emotion understanding mediated the effect of parental ERSBs on parent-rated externalizing behavior problems. We found evidence of an indirect, supportive pathway from parental expressive
encouragement via child emotion understanding to externalizing behavior problems in children
;ɴс-.17; 95% CI [ -.3606, -.0193]), providing support for the mediation hypothesis. We also
replicated previous findings linking parental ERSBs to child emotion understanding and behavior problems. Parental distress reactions were positively correlated with externalizing child behavior problems (r = 0.42; p < .01), parental expressive encouragement was positively correlated with child emotion understanding (r = 0.42; p < .01), and child emotion understanding was negatively
correlated with externalizing behavior problems (r со͘ϰϬ; p < .05).
Summary of paper III - Testing TIK (Tuning in to Kids) with TEC (Test of Emotion Comprehension):
Does enhanced emotion socialization improve child emotion understanding?
42
In paper III, the main objective was to examine whether enhanced parental ERSBs predicted changes in children’s external, mental, reflective, and total emotion understanding. We found that TIK led to significant positive changes in parental expressive encouragement for parents in the intervention condition, but not in controls (Cohen’s d = 1.01; p = .003). In addition, parental emotion-focused reactions significantly decreased in parents in both conditions from baseline to follow-up (Cohen’s d = .74; p = .042). For children in both conditions, there were statistically significant positive improvements in external (Cohen’s d = .73; p = .026) and total emotion
understanding over time (Cohen’s d = .90; p = .019). There were no statistically significant effects of the parenting intervention on child emotion understanding.
When improved parental ERSBs were included as predictors in the multilevel models on emotion understanding from baseline to six-months follow-up, parental expressive encouragement (assessed at baseline and follow-up) positively predicted external (b = .14) and total emotion understanding in children (b = .36). Unexpectedly, parental emotion-focused responses negatively predicted children’s scores on external (b = -.11) and total emotion understanding (b = -.44).
Discussion
In the current thesis, the primary objective was to replicate previous findings published in emotion socialization literature in a Nordic cultural context. A secondary aim was to explore how maternal and paternal ERSBs worked in tandem as predictors of externalizing behavior problems, to test the PMEP model, and to examine whether improved ERSBs led to changes in children’s external, mental, reflective, and total emotion understanding.
A main finding from this thesis was that parental ERSBs predicted emotion understanding and externalizing behavior problems in Norwegian samples of kindergarten children. Another important result was that maternal and paternal ERSBs worked in tandem and interacted as predictors of externalizing behavior problems. Children had more externalizing problems when fathers were high in non-supportive ERSBs and mothers high in supportive ERSBs, as compared to families were